Are challenges too much to read?

Would not one entry per person help? 94 tales will take me until 2014 at my present snail like progress!

My view on the challengers is different than some others. I joined the library for recreational purposes, not for it to be a job. I don't feel any obligation to be a literary critic so I'm not really interested in reading all the stories but I am interested in reading the stories that turn me on. So what I do is open the story, scan it, and if it is a story that I think that I would like, I read it and vote on it according to how much I liked it.

The challenges are, as someone mentioned, popularity contests with the most popular winning. The reader judges the story by his/her own criteria.

If the number of stories is too large one way of making it more manageable is to add other restrictions. For example, there could be challenges for F/M stories only, or F/m only, F/f only, adult only, adult/child only, etc. That way stories that only appeal to a certain group of readers, for example F/m, would have a chance of winning.

Like the lottery. You only need one to win. No, I agree with that. One is my limit for challenges.

I guess I like the challenges. Somehow I get inspired and the ideas get translated into stories that turn out pretty good. I can't look at this as a competition, though. I did once, but no more. The results are too random because they depend too much on the luck factor of garnering lots of readers who vote. I get lots of great comments but if the commenters were the only ones who read the story, guess what? It won't win because they are a relatively small number. So if you win, don't get all that excited---you had a large number of readers who voted. If you lose, but get great comments, you can also count that as a win.

It's good thing the voting period has been extended but I predict that by week 4 there will be little or no activity on the challenge page. The enthusiasm for these things lasts for about 2 1/2 weeks and then the readership moves on to something else, just like with new stories that are posted.

The word restriction rule did force me to make choices, but it was an interesting exercise. But at least one story was withdrawn because it had just too much in it to be held to 2500 words, and this was "The Legend of Sophia the Fair". I really wanted this one in the contest but editing down to 2500 words was too painful and I'm glad I didn't. I like it the way it is.

I guess limiting entries is ok, but that's making it more like a real contest, which it isn't. Same with splitting into divisions which would also be ok. Personally I don't like competing with the child stories. Mine are a whole different genre. If we really want a writing contest, then some other scoring method would have to be employed.

At least in the current format, this can't be taken seriously as a competition, but then i gather it was never really intended to be so taken. And people who say reading every story is too much work, then don't, i say. Read as many as you care for, then stop. I have so far read about 25, but may read all 94. One thing I am doing, if I read and vote on a story, i *will* comment on it. But that is just my choice.

I would dislike a 1-story-per-author limit. To me the main point of the challenges is to produce more good stories. Anything which obstructs that is IMO counterproductive.

The old SSS SSC contests used to use a panel of volunteer readers. From this panel, each submission would be assigned three or four readers at random, each of whom would produce a rating (1-5 or 1-10 most years) and a review/comment. Those ratings would be used to generate a short list of finalists, and the eventual winners chose by popular vote from the finalists. This worked with hundreds of entries, but then the SSC lasted all summer.

I do understand that the challenge entries are not validated before they are posted for reading and voting. I'm not sure why this is. I would think that the proofreading the validators do would be useful, at least, and for some the synopses and icons would also be good, i think. Challenge entries could be validated as they come in, with perhaps an extra week before they are displayed to get them all done. But perhaps there are good reasons not to do this, or perhaps it would be more of a headache than i would think.

Anyway, the library and the challenges are for our enjoyment, and we should keep that, well FIRMLY in mind.

Rather then validating, which would knock all the validates out of the competition and voting because of knowing who and what, perhaps the titles could contain the following..."title title..M/F." What ever the genre of the story could be at the end of the title, that will let people select the types of stories they will read and vote on. This will ensure M/F stories will get the vast majority of reads and votes however that is simply life as we know it.

I am sorry, but the complaining and such turns me off and I am seriously thinking of asking Admin to pull my stories out. It is no fun anymore.

It seems to me that, if you award marks to one entry, you have an obligation to read all of them. There were certainly entries that didn't appeal to me because of their content; I reacted accordingly. Often without adding an explanatory comment. Sorry, canadianspankee.
I like tiptopper's idea of categories, to give us an idea of what we are about to encounter.
Perhaps there should be a requirement to both read and comment upon all entries if our verdict is to be registered. Hard work, but we're up to it.
Some cracking entries. I look forward to discovering who were the authors of my own favourites.

I reach an overload on similar stories, no matter how well written.* Even with more time to read, I don't think I will continue to wade through the growing number of stories per contest. I will continue to submit my ONE entry per challenge if I come up with an idea that appeals to me, but will leave the reading/voting to others (whose efforts I appreciate!)


* You all know what I mean - rowboats being used without permission in one challenge, people carelessly wandering out into the snowy outdoors in another, and heirs needing to be spanked in order to receive an inheritance in another. Nothing wrong with these interpretations on the prompts (and yes, I was often with the crowd), but I tire of having a good story -line becoming stale with repetition.

Challenge entries aren't validated for several reasons. Firstly, the authors would then be known to the validators and they'd thereby be excluded from voting. In reality, I'm sure they'd vote fairly anyway but if they don't know who the stories are by, then it's a non issue.

Secondly, the whole idea of the challenge is not to pick and choose what to read but to try and read everything, even if it's not of your preferred orientation. If people only want to read items which match their specific preferences then they'd be better off sticking with the non-challenge stories.

Thirdly, a whole batch of challenge entries always come in at the last minute and I barely have the time to load them let alone get them validated by anyone.

Fourthly, the challenge stories are intended to be read as submitted and not corrected for errors.


Nothing wrong whatsoever with taking that stance - in which case the best thing to do is wait till the challenge is over and the entries have been validated, then cherry pick the ones likely to be of interest.


I'm afraid we get this kind of thing almost every challenge and I also find it wearisome. By the time the voting is ended the whole thing has lost any appeal it might have had at the outset and is simply a source of contention. I can't see how pulling your stories out solves anything though, apart from adding to the aggravation.

We will have another challenge some time next year, especially as I've already got a theme and done the graphic for it but I think it might be time to call it a day after that as personally I really don't need all the complaining that accompanies them.